TIGRAN SARGSYAN: ARMENIA WELCOMES COLLABORATION WITH UN
PanARMENIAN.Net
24.03.2010 19:49 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Armenian Prime Minister Tigran Sargsyan met with
newly appointed Resident Coordinator, Permanent Representative of
the UNDP in Armenia Dafina Gercheva.
Armenian Prime Minister congratulated Dafina Gercheva on her
appointment, emphasizing the importance of RA-UN cooperation and
implementation of joint programs.
OPEN FORUM: SCRAP THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE RESOLUTION
By Fred Gedrich
San Francisco Chronicle
March 22 2010
The House Foreign Affairs Committee recently presented the Obama
administration with a major foreign policy headache by needlessly
resurrecting and passing a nonbinding Armenia genocide resolution. The
committee vote ignited a firestorm that threatens U.S.-Turkey
relations, U.S. national security, and a recent Armenian and Turkish
agreement to normalize relations.
President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and Secretary of State
Hillary Rodham Clinton have publicly identified with the Armenian view
of events. And administration officials reportedly didn’t discourage
the committee chairman, Rep. Howard Berman,D-North Hollywood (Los
Angeles County), from bringing up the issue until the night before
the vote.
The resolution — which passed the committee 23 to 22 (with 17
Democrats and 6 Republicans voting for it) — accuses Turkey’s former
Ottoman Empire of killing 1.5 million Armenians and displacing 500,000
others from 1915 to 1923 — and calls upon President Obama to publicly
label the act genocide.
The resolution doesn’t discuss the alternative views of Turkey’s
government and of some historians who claim that between 250,000
to 500,000 Armenians, and as many Muslims, died in civil strife and
war-related deaths when Armenians sided with Russian invaders against
the country during World War I.
During the Cold War, Christian Armenia was an enslaved Soviet Union
member while secular Muslim Turkey allied itself with the United
States and its allies against Soviet tyranny and hegemony.
Today, Turkey is an important diplomatic and security player in
Afghanistan, Iran and Iraq. It also hosts an important U.S. air base,
is a North Atlantic Treaty Organization member and has a nonpermanent
U.N. Security Council seat.
The committee’s action infuriated Turkish leaders and citizens.
Turkey’s Prime Minister, Tayyip Erdogan, immediately recalled
the country’s new ambassador to the United States, Namik Tan, for
consultations and stated the resolution "will greatly harm bilateral
relations, interests and visions."
Chairman Berman quoted the International Association of Genocide
Scholars as a basis for the committee vote, "As crimes of genocide
continue to plague the world, Turkey’s policy of denying the Armenian
Genocide give license to those who perpetrate genocide everywhere."
However, the United States already has a solid record on this issue.
The United States’ Ottoman envoy, Henry Morgenthau, organized and led
protests against the alleged Armenian persecution; 132,000 Armenian
orphans became American citizens as a result of congressional
assistance and action; and Presidents Reagan, Clinton and Bush
acknowledged the forced exile and annihilation of Armenians in 1981,
1998 and 2004 proclamations.
Notwithstanding pressures brought by powerful Armenian American
and Greek American lobbies and others to pass the resolution, it’s
unnecessary, irresponsible and dangerous for the Congress to do so —
especially since the event occurred nine decades ago, the Ottoman
government no longer exists and the perpetrators are dead.
President Obama spoke before the Turkish Parliament in early 2009
asking Turks to "help bridge the gap between Muslim and Western
worlds." The resolution, if presented to and/or passed by the full
House of Representatives, stands to blow-up the bridge between America
and Turkey.
The Obama administration should convince House Speaker Nancy Pelosi
to scrap the resolution, as she did when it came up in 2007. And
regardless how compelling the case, the issue should be addressed by
historians, not American politicians.
Fred Gedrich is a foreign policy and national security analyst. He
served in the Departments of State and Defense and visited Armenia
and Turkey on official assignments.
WHICH VERSION IS EXPEDIENT FOR RP
1.html
14:41:35 – 23/03/2010
The interview of the Armenian former foreign minister Vardan Oskanyan,
in which he stated about the reasonability of change of power in
Armenia, caused strong reaction within the Republican Party. RP members
made statements one after another, who retorted that they only continue
the policy "embedded" by the same Oskanyan, together with his patron,
Robert Kocharyan. Then, they contradicted themselves saying that
Serge Sargsyan conducts a more proactive policy, which seeks for the
participation of Karabakh in the negotiations, declares non-recognition
of the Kars Treaty, and last year he was attended by 8 presidents.
Not going into details of the quarrel between the former and current
powers, let us focus on the fact that Vardan Oskanyan did not propose
extraordinary elections but only change of power. Hence, his statement
does not correspond to the opinion of the Armenian National Congress
which demands extraordinary elections to be held this summer.
What Vardan Oskanyan means by change of power, if not extraordinary
elections? Apparently, we are talking about a "velvet" change of power,
when some person, who is not "from the team", is appointed to a post
and the power smoothly flows into the hands of the new or old team –
without any elections. Thus one can exclude the participation of the
opposition, and social upheavals that accompany elections.
Which of these versions is expedient for the Republican Party –
elections in which the HAK, ARF, and Heritage will surely take part,
or "velvet" shift of power which may be handed to Robert Kocharyan? RP
officially refuses Robert Kocharyan. "Today, the Republican Party
along with the coalition has enough force and we do not need new
people. If there is some need, we perhaps, will turn to Robert
Kocharyan as an experienced political figure. Let us digest March 1",
said the Vice-chairman of the Republican Party Razmik Zohrabyan,
putting responsibility for March 1 on Robert Kocharyan. Under the
current situation, extraordinary elections may seem a better version
for the RP.
4 ARMENIANS WIN REGIONAL ELECTIONS IN FRANCE
PanARMENIAN.Net
22.03.2010 19:52 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ Armenian Community of France took active
participation in regional elections of the country.
As EAFJD chairman Hilda Choboian told PanARMENIAN.Net reporter,
39 representatives of Armenian Community of France ran for regional
elections, with 4 of them gaining victories: Frederik Sargis (Paris)
with 56,69 % of votes, Garo Hovsepian (South-eastern France) with
44,11% of votes, Edward Simonian (Rhône-Alpes) with 50,76% of votes
and Marie-Ann Arakelian (South Pyrenees) with 67,77% of votes.
Hilda Choboian, Rhône-Alpes candidate in the elections, has taken
the 26th position in voting list, and will soon be given a post in
regional council.
The second tour of regional elections was due in France on March 21.
ARTAK DAVTIAN’S OPINION, PROCESS OF NORMALIZATION OF ARMENIA-TURKEY RELATIONS HAS NOT FAILED
Noyan Tapan
March 22, 2010
YEREVAN, MARCH 22, NOYAN TAPAN. The process of normalization of
Armenia-Turkey relations has not failed. Artak Davtian, the Chairman of
the RA NA Standing Committee on Science, Education, Culture, Youth and
Sports Affairs, a member of the RPA faction, expressed such an opinion
at a March 22 press conference. "The Armenian-Turkish process is very
complicated and there will be delays, which we witness," he mentioned
adding that the process continues and Turkey is likely to ratify the
Armenian-Turkish protocols. "Armenia continues its initiating policy
in this process, now Turkey should undertake corresponding steps,"
A. Davtian said. Meanwhile he mentioned RA President’s words that
Armenia will ratify the protocols only after they are ratified by the
Turkish parliament. In his opinion, the whole international community
expects constructive steps by Turkey.
Speaking about the process of international recognition of the
Armenian Genocide A. Davtian said that the civilized world does not
link the issue of Genocide with the normalization of Armenia-Turkey
relations. In his words, parliaments of various countries will continue
discussing and adopting the resolution. In his opinion, sooner or later
Turkey should also recognize the Genocide as a country striving for
democracy, membership to the European Union cannot act in another way.
TURKEY PROVOKES A NEW KARABAKH WAR, SAYS RAZMIK ZOHRABIAN
Aysor
March 22 2010
Armenia
Process of Armenia-Turkey reconciliation has just been fastened down,
and as Ankara imposes conditions in relation to the settlement to
the Karabakh conflict, then the only guilty side of this is Turkey,
said at today’s press conference Deputy Chairman of the Republican
Party of Armenia Razmik Zohrabian.
"War threats, made by Azerbaijani side, are more provoked by Turkey
to sabotage talks, than by Azerbaijan. They are provoking a new war
to present it as a reason in future," said Razmik Zohrabian.
According to politician, Turkey can open border without ratifying
protocols: "Turkey has one-sided closed the border, so it can under
the same order open the border without establishing bilateral relations
and ratifying protocols."
Referring to the Resolution 252 on the 1915 Genocide, Razmik
Zohrabian said that its approval by the U.S. Congress depends in
Turkey’s behavior.
WAS POLITICAL MESS OVER ARMENIAN GENOCIDE MEASURE AVOIDABLE?
Jason Epstein
The Cutting Edge
rticle=12055&pageid=44&pagename=Slices
Mar ch 22 2010
The Armenian Genocide Back to Slices
Did a lack of decisiveness at the White House result in a missed
opportunity to end the near-regular Congressional charade of judging
the horrific events in Eastern Anatolia of nearly 100 years ago?
Not surprisingly, the recent passage of the resolution labeling as
genocide the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Armenians by a panel
in the House of Representatives caused Turks across the political
spectrum to express their outrage. The Foreign Ministry recalled envoy
Namik Tan for consultations, less than two weeks after he arrived in
Washington as the new ambassador. A senior ministry official predicted
that any hope of near-term progress on the Turkey-Armenia Protocols,
a bold attempt to by the two governments to resolve contentious
bilateral and regional issues, was gone. "So much for the new era
of US appreciation for the sensitivities and cultural nuances of
America’s allies," a Wall Street Journal editorial quipped.
Interestingly, the resolution passed the House Foreign Affairs
Committee by only a single vote, 23-22. Not only was the outcome
closer than an identical one from two years ago (27-21), but Chairman
Howard Berman (D-California) held the vote open for an astonishing
90 minutes in order to ensure that he had just enough votes to keep
the measure from going down in flames.
As both a senator and presidential candidate, Barack Obama repeatedly
called the events of 1915 a "genocide." However, President Obama has
not uttered the offending term, even when addressing the Turkish
Parliament 11 months ago. Moreover, in his Presidential Message
of April 24, the date that the American government recognizes the
Armenian deaths, the President again demurred. All indications now
are that his message next month will also not include the phrase. For
acting with such restraint, he deserves significant credit.
However, neither he nor his advisors commented on the resolution until
the very last minute, even though it had been re-introduced in both
houses of Congress over one year ago.
One week before the scheduled vote, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
hinted that the State Department still opposed to the resolution,
although she did not use explicit language.
Two days before the vote, the National Security Council spokesman
had no comment as to whether the White House would issue a statement,
let alone actively lobby against the resolution.
The night before the vote, Clinton telephoned Chairman Berman, urging
him to call it off, to no avail.
One day after the vote, a senior unnamed White House official told
a Washington Post reporter that an agreement had been reached with
Congressional leaders to ensure that the full body will not vote on
the resolution.
No wonder that an American journalist covering the issue described
the administration’s position as "addled."
A defeat of the resolution, which the Washington Post editorial
board once described as "worse than irrelevant," would have made
clear that Congress was not interested in peddling a measure that
unabashedly seeks to undermine, not just the strategic relationship
between the United States and Turkey, but eviscerate any possibility
of reconciliation between Turkey and Armenia.
Furthermore, Washington has not addressed one of the principal barriers
to the successful implementation of the Turkey-Armenia Protocols:
Azerbaijan’s concern that the Armenian seizure of its territory is
being ignored. After all, the closing of the border between Turkey
and Armenia in 1993 was a result of the conflict over the Armenian
occupation of Karabakh and surrounding territory, not the genocide
claims.
Azerbaijan is a pro-Western country, despite being sandwiched
between Russia and Iran, and has sent soldiers to Iraq, Afghanistan,
and Kosovo at the request of the United States and NATO. A major
hydrocarbon producer, Azerbaijan may one day end Europe’s addiction
to the current Russian energy monopoly with the Nabucco natural gas
pipeline project. Incredibly, the White House has not appeared too
interested in Azerbaijan’s strategic importance: on the one hand, it
has reportedly pressured Ankara to pursue parliamentary ratification;
on the other, it has not even bothered to send up the name of its
next ambassador to Baku to the Senate for confirmation, eight months
after the previous envoy departed.
Since man has yet to figure out a way to turn back time, we will
never know if a more strident effort from the White House against the
Armenian resolution would have persuaded a single Foreign Affairs
Committee member to switch their vote from "aye" to "nay," thereby
frightening its supporters, both in Congress and the grassroots,
from pushing another such vote for a decade or more.
What is known is that the Committee’s action did additional harm
to America’s image in Turkey and Azerbaijan, an outcome that surely
was not desired by an administration purportedly looking to repair
Washington’s relations in Muslim capitals.
Cutting Edge commentator Jason Epstein is President of Southfive
Strategies, LLC, in Washington, DC. He may be reached via e-mail
at [email protected].
IF THERE’S FAILURE, THEN OSKANIAN HIMSELF IS RESPONSIBLE: REPUBLICAN PARTY OF ARMENIA MP
Tert.am
22.03.10
"I’m beginning to get amazed at our [former] Minister of Foreign
Affairs’ statements, particularly connected with the statement
that Armenia has found itself in the state it was in 1998, when the
Nagorno-Karabakh negotiations failed. It’s amazing that the [again,
former] Minister of Foreign Affairs is speaking of failing.
"It can be said that, for 10 years, he, together with our team, has
presented foreign policies and negotiations, and if there’s any failure
or error, then the main personal responsibility falls on him," said
Republican Party of Armenia Deputy Chair Razmik Zohrabyan, referring to
former Foreign Minister of Armenia Vardan Oskanian’s earlier statements
on the current administration and the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
According to Zohrabyan, it’s been two years since Oskanian left his
post as foreign minister, during that time, nothing new took place
in the negotiating process that the former foreign minister wouldn’t
have known about.
news.az, Azerbaijan
March 21 2010
I propose to Azerbaijan to sign an agreement not to use force, Serzh Sargsyan
Sat 20 March 2010 | 10:06 GMT Text size:
Armenian President spoke with Euronews about the Armenian ‘genocide’,
relations between his country and Turkey, and on the frozen conflict
of Karabakh
President Sargsyan, with 23 votes in favour of the resolution and 22
against, the Foreign Affairs Committee of the United States’ House of
Representatives has decided to declare that the 1915 massacre of over
one million Armenians by the Ottoman Turks was genocide. Why do you
think the committee has voted the resolution now?
Discussions on the recognition of the Armenian genocide are not new in
the political life of the United States of America.
Several times at least in the past 10 years, the Foreign Affairs
Committee of the House of Representatives has tried to vote on the
resolution.
Forty-two states in the US have recognized the events as genocide, so
the resolution on the 4th of March is neither a surprise nor a new
thing for us.
Do you think of any particular reason for them voting it now, in this
particular context of Turkish-Armenian reconciliation?
We are currently in discussions with Turkey on the issue of
re-establishing our relations. This should be done without any
preconditions, and I think that Turkey has no moral right to blame us
about anything or to impose any conditions. Re-establishing relations
without preconditions means we are not under any obligations to stay
away from any of the possible topics.
Let’s say that, by some miracle, the Turkish Parliament ratifies the
protocols, the Armenian Parliament does the same, we re-establish our
relations and a third country, which is against us re-establishing our
relations, on purpose takes up the genocide issue. Will the Turks,
therefore, use this as a pretext and break off relations?
If Armenia’s major problems now are unemployment, economic isolation
and long- running disputes with Turkey and Azerbaijan, can these
problems be more easily solved now?
Our difficulties with Turkey did not begin yesterday. For 17 years,
Turkey has kept the Armenian border under blockade. Was there such a
resolution 17 years ago? We fully understand that Turkey is a big
country ‘ in terms of population, territory and power¦ vastly bigger
than Armenia. And if we lived apart from each other we would [also]
understand. But since Armenia and Turkey are part of the international
community, and the United States, France and the European Union are
too, then the international community must assess the developments and
situations as they unfold.
If this issue is of paramount concern for Armenians both at home and
in the Diaspora, could you please tell us why the Yerevan State
University awarded an honorary degree to the Iranian President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad in 2007? The Iranian president denies the Holocaust.
You know, we cannot oblige our neighbours to think as we do. One
should not narrow things down to a single person. To bestow upon the
leader of a country an honorific reward signifies an expression of
gratitude and recognition towards the people of that country. The
Iranians have been our neighbours for centuries and they are very
important to us.
Would you call the Yerevan state university’s decision Armenian `realpolitik’?
I would consider it as a particular approach by the State University
of Yerevan towards a particular issue, an approach quite current in
Europe and in the democratically developed countries of the world.
You are quoted as having said in London, in February, that Nagorno
Karabakh was never a part of independent Azerbaijan. Well, the
international community seems to have another opinion, another
assessment.
The international community does not have a different vision. History
is well-known¦ Nagorno Karabakh was not a part of independent
Azerbaijan. It was the Caucasus Bureau of the Communist Party of the
Soviet Union which attached Nagorno Karabakh to Azerbaijan.
Why did the international community acclaim the collapse of the Soviet
Union and not consider Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan and
Uzbekistan part and parcel of the Soviet Union? ‘ still saying
Karabakh is an integral part of Azerbaidjan? It is not logical, is it?
What kind of compromises are you willing to make in order to achieve a
peaceful resolution of this conflict?
One cannot eliminate the consequences of this conflict without
addressing its causes. And when speaking about the causes¦ we talk
about recognising the people of Nagorno Karabakh’s right of self
determination¦ the recognition of this right and its implementation.
The other problems will be solved rapidly after that.
The Armenian parts of this conflict, Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh, are
profoundly interested in a swift resolution of this conflict. But a
sustainable resolution that would allow for peace and security in the
region, as opposed to giving Azerbaijan Nagorno Karabakh, which would
spell the end of its existence.
Azerbaijan states very clearly that it will never ever accept Nagorno
Karabakh as an independent entity. They will never let it go.
What does the international community propose to us? To solve this
conflict on the basis of three principles of international law:
firstly, self-determination; secondly, territorial integrity; and
thirdly, the non-use of force. I propose, through you, the media, to
appeal to Azerbaijan to sign an agreement not to use force. This would
instill trust in the Armenian people of Karabakh and Armenia. And
under these conditions of trust we would begin the negotiations for a
settlement. We Armenians know very well what Azerbaijan’s territorial
integrity means. We’ve talked about it openly several times. The
Azerbaijanis¦ can they say what the right of self-determination means
for the people of Nagorno Karabakh?
When we issue joint declarations about the right of
self-determination, Azerbaijan is not talking about the Armenian
people’s right to self-determination but of the right of the main
player in the conflict¦ the people of Nagorno Karabakh.
Source: Euronews
PRESIDENT SERZH SARGSYAN RECEIVED THE MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF SLOVAKIA, MIROSLAV LAJCAK
president.am
March 19 2010
Armenia
Today, President Serzh Sargsyan received the Minister of Foreign
Affairs of Slovakia. Miroslav Lajcak and his delegation are in Yerevan
on an official visit.
Welcoming Minister Lajcak, President Sargsyan expressed satisfaction
with the high level of the Armenian-Slovak bilateral relations and
noted that Armenia was interested in deepening relations with that
country. Serzh Sargsyan said that the two countries have no problems
which means that there is an excellent base for the development
of cooperation.
The President of Armenia expressed gratitude to the Slovak Parliament
for the adoption in 2004 of the resolution on the recognition of the
Armenian Genocide.
President Sargsyan expressed hope that the visit of the Minister of
Foreign Affairs of Slovakia would strengthen relations between the
two countries. The President of Armenia extended an invitation to
the President of Slovakia to visit Armenia.
In his turn, Miroslav Lajcak said that albeit much has been
accomplished on a political level, there are still many opportunities
for deepening cooperation and utilizing the existing potential,
particularly in the areas of trade and economy. Noting, that on his
visit to Armenia he is accompanied by a group of Slovak businessmen,
Minister Lajcak expressed hope, that the Armenian-Slovak Business
Forum would create new opportunities for the opening up of the business
relations between the entrepreneurs of our countries.
The President of Armenia and the Foreign Minister of Slovakia discussed
issues pertinent to the enhancement of the relations in political,
economic, and cultural areas, stressing at the same time the importance
of expanding the legal basis of relations. They also exchanged views on
the Armenia-EU cooperation and steps to be taken on that direction. The
parties concurred that the EU Eastern Partnership program provides
new opportunities for the enhancement of the Armenian-Slovak relations
on bilateral as well as multilateral levels.
Miroslav Lajcak informed the President of Armenia that he had handed to
his Armenian counterpart a number of proposals on bilateral cooperation
in the framework of the Eastern Partnership.
At the request of the Slovak Minister, the President of Armenia spoke
about the recent developments in the NK peace process, presented
Yerevan’s official position on that issue and reflected on a number
of regional and international issues of mutual interest. At the same
time, President Sargsyan hailed Slovakia’s balanced position regarding
our regional issues.